Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 202,105

“Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? [...] What does God care what we call him?”

From the desk of Soeren Kern on Fri, 2007-08-24 11:56 Europeans love to mock the salience of religion in American society. via The Brussels Journal

Full Story

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193235 Oct 23, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>Jesus Delivers His Keynote Address: The Revelation of the Father's Son
The prologue began with the relation of the Father and the Son, and now Jesus' first major public teaching in this Gospel begins with the same topic. It is this relationship that makes sense out of everything Jesus says or does, and so this rich passage requires special attention.
Jesus begins his defense by saying the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing (v. 19). He is completely dependent upon the Father. thought and action. He does nothing by himself, or [...]more literally, "from himself" (aph heautou); his source of being and activity is not himself but his Father. He cannot act from himself, for to do so would be to exist autonomously from God. There is one who is autonomous, namely, the devil (cf. comment on 8:44). The Son is distinct from the Father (or he would not be the Son), but he is not autonomous.
More is involved, however, for Jesus is not simply the ideal son, but the unique Son, "the One and Only" (1:14, 18). Therefore, when Jesus says the Son sees what his Father is doing he is not saying that he makes rational deductions regarding God's activity from what he can observe in Scripture or history or nature. Rather, since Jesus is in the bosom of the Father (1:18), totally at one with the Father (10:30), he sees God differently than anyone else ever has (1:18; 6:46). While he is referring to his human experience, as the next verse makes clear, he has a sensitivity beyond human experience to God's voice, because his intimacy with God is unclouded by sin. This sight, then, refers to his constant communion with his Father,[...] According to this verse, such is all he, the Son, can do.
Jesus himself, who is the unique Son and who alone has seen God,[...]God through the Spirit as we see in the Son (cf. chaps. 13--17).
Jesus explains his relationship with the Father through a series of four explanatory clauses (5:19-23), each headed by the conjunction gar (variously translated in the NIV). He begins by saying he can only do what he sees the Father doing because [gar] whatever the Father does the Son also does (v. 19). Here the same unity of action is stated, yet it is not in terms of limitation (the Son can only do what he sees the Father doing), but through a mind-boggling claim of completeness. He does everything (ha gar an, translated whatever) the Father does. That is, not only is everything in Jesus' life reflective of God the Father, but also everything the Father does is reflected in Jesus' life. Jesus is claiming to be the full revelation of the Father (cf. 15:15; 16:13, 15; 17:10).
If i take too long composing a post and forget to copy it before i send it, nothing will appear.
You mentioned Matt. 22:34 well it talks about god's theoretical rolechange so the sentense continues with He ...god of the living.
Because greek concepts are introduced even greek gods like OURANOS as heaven enter the discussion about women and death and resurrecting, and therefore He becomes in that theoretical case 'god of the living'.
Later on we see that he thus muzzled the sadducees by avoiding the question. The pharisees come and take a looksee and ask themselves what the main directives are.
One quotes them and they decide not to go for muzzling jesus, but to let him be . Especially when heclaims spiritcontact with the resurrected OURANOS occupant thus David the king messiah. Claiming he will give him strenght against all enemies, because David called Jesus Lord in the spirit dream.
Frankly i would not know who the father is, since in Matt. he claims the fatherlike king/divine/messianic properties.
SO father = DAVID.= SPIRIT/comforter =YHVH is salvation.
Just as real as women reincarnating in heaven. So is his spirit-talk with David.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#193236 Oct 23, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Another examples: A person says to his wife in anger, "I swear I will never sleep with you again".
A person says to his child in anger, "I swear I will never talk to you again".
These are not oaths or vows, they are figures of speech said in anger, oh slippery deceiver. And you KNOW what you are doing. But anyway, the discussion was about me asking Alex if Muhammad ever gave his mean permission to deceive, and if he did, what's to say that Muhammad himself would never deceive> Alex said Muhammad was not a deceiver, so I asked him if Muhammad gave permission for his men to deceive so that they can murder someone. And, being the honest guy that Alex is, he changed by question to be me asking if Muhammad ever told his men to lie about God's commands, when that was never in my question. See the deception? See the tap dancing? There's always a little angle going on. Always trying to change the question so that it can be answered. Always deceptive little tweaks being attempted. And this is deemed clever rather than evasive, dishonest and shameful. There seems to be no sense of shame in doing things like this in Muslim morality.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193237 Oct 23, 2013
correction: reincarnated-resurrected.
Alex WM

London, UK

#193238 Oct 23, 2013
HughBe wrote:
HughBe--- what are you a seeker of?
Skr--- So do you think it is okay to "hit back" by utterly trashing Jesus with completely false and perverted interpretations of verses about Jesus that have no basis at all?
HughBe--- Is Alex really trashing the person who he accepts as Jesus?
Skr---So it is okay to make up pornographic stories of Jesus, if they just want to get someone back.
HughBe---Would it be ok if the stories were non-pornographic?
HughBe ---In my mind and I might be wrong he is trashing your Jesus and not his Jesus.
Skr---Is my Jesus your Jesus or is his Jesus your Jesus?
HughBe--- My Jesus is in the scriptures. As for your Jesus and Alex's Jesus both of you must decide whether or not your Jesus is my Jesus.
HughBe --In addition, IF you are one of those who say negative things about Mohammad then he might think that you are being utterly false in the things that you say.
Skr--But I actually back those statements up with clear Muslims sources... Would you like me to quote one or two so you can tell me how YOU interpret them?
HughBe--- I have no dog in the fight.
HughBe --Note and understand the matter of "false and perverted interpretations" are subjective.
Skr---So that means that, on the one hand, he doesn't even believe what he is saying..., but on other hand he might mean what he says .., because interpretations are subjective. So which is it? You can pick whatever you want, but both choices can't be right at the same time.
HughBe--- Take your time to digest my words again. The matter of "false and perverted interpretations" are subjective.
HughBe ---MAYBE you are are candidate for the same accusation.
Skr---That's possible. Can you provide an example and explain it and substantiate it?
HughBe--- Did you really say "That's possible" to my MAYBE? Explain MAYBE. Why don't YOU give an example since you said that it was POSSIBLE.
HughBe --If that is so,
Skr--We don't know if that is so or not yet, until you provide further explanation and substantiation.
HughBe--- Did YOU not say that "That's possible"? YES. So what substantiation are you asking for?
HughBe ---then take the beam out of your own eyes before you seek to take it out of the eyes of others.
Skr---..basically saying that it is okay to invent completely wild and unsubstantiated pornographic stories...
HughBe--- I am saying that YOU are not understanding YOUR words and mine. Go back and reread them.
Skr--- Now, that said, can you tell me any unsubstantiated stories that I have made up about Muhammad?
HughBe--- Your thoughts are not coherent. Your current point does not follow the one immediately above.
Skr---I assume that you are a Christian,
HughBe--- I am called a Christian
Skr--Okay, so maybe you are not. That wasn't a direct answer, but that's okay.
HughBe--- I am a Wayite.
Skr-- In fact, sometimes your behavior suggests that you would be an excellent candidate for conversion to Islam.
HughBe--- I take that as a compliment.
Skr---Well then what is stopping you?
HughBe--- If someone said, your sister is good-looking would you take it as a compliment? Would you want to become your sister?
Skr-- Have you ever considered converting?
HughBe---.. The answer is NO for all 3.
Skr---I asked you about Islam, and you read my question correctly the first time. You are not stupid, just simply evasive.
HughBe--- NO is not evasive to normal people.
Skr-- You either are a Muslim masquerading.., as Muslims often tend to do, or you are at least far more of a friend to Islam than ..to Christianity.
HughBe--- I'm a Muslim, in your mind. I am a friend of TRUTH and so for me to be closer to Islam than Christianity it means that Islam is closer to the TRUTH.
I love you, dear brother HughBe. I am holding back my tears.
It was a beautiful & insightful post.
You do great justice to Jesus PBUH, the wonderful man of God, who would have responded similarly to folks who tried to hurt his loving heart by taunting/tormenting him.
God Bless you.
Peace.
Alex
Alex WM

London, UK

#193239 Oct 23, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Occasional medication ain't a bad option, lest you get exhausted.
Take care.
lol..
Love that sense of humour!
We all can do with loads of it.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#193240 Oct 23, 2013
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

Matthew 22:34-40

New International Version (NIV)
The Greatest Commandment

Matthew 22:34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?

37 Jesus replied:Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it:Love your neighbor as yourself.[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

Footnotes:

Matthew 22:37 Deut. 6:5
Matthew 22:39 Lev. 19:18

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193241 Oct 23, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Say what!
<quoted text>
Neither the Father nor Jesus said that. Who said such a thing so absurd?
<quoted text>
"I am" is a very intense way in every language. I have told you and others many times that Greek is scripturally a poor and an unfit language. That is why God never gave any scripture in Greek and neither any prophet spoke in Greek.
God Almighty said, "I am the God of Abraham." That is fine, but Jesus did not say, "I am God of Abraham". So, here he gets debunked as God.
We have done this "Before Abraham was born, I am" many times and it does not show that Jesus was telling the Jews that he was their "I am that I am" or "I will always be what I am".
He did not even say, "Before Abraham was born, I was the I am that I am". That is a foolish claim.
<quoted text>
The obsession with 'I am" gets absurd. "I am with you always,, simply means "I will always be with you".
What came first? The language or grammar?
First he relates a spirit-talk-with resurrected king David=father example, Always at his side=strenght of g-d =comforter / spirit.
Strenght of g-d is a better way of putting it then writing YHVH.
But the kid get's the name eventually.
(Though debatable and done allrady)

But Avram is a matter of either age discussion:'i'm an elder too.'
Or it's the spirit-talk taking over.
Jeus blabbers aramaic, and as long as he does not muzzle people it's fine, and even then some.
Jews do frankly not care whatever happens after death.
Maybe now some factins do, but then it did not matter.
If one wanted to be resurected in a greek idea of heaven ...go ahead. Born agains as a star....just be forgotten..
How you lived counted!
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#193242 Oct 23, 2013
CORRECTION:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

Matthew 22:34-40

New International Version (NIV)
The Greatest Commandment

Matthew 22:34 Hearing that "BJ" had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?

37 "BJ" replied:Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it:Love your neighbor as yourself.[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

Footnotes:

Matthew 22:37 Deut. 6:5
Matthew 22:39 Lev. 19:18

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193243 Oct 23, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
lol..
Love that sense of humour!
We all can do with loads of it.
I can't sleep, so i just continue.
This has to do as medicine.

It is slightly better then the discussion about lemontrees and toads a.o. on the other forum.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#193244 Oct 23, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
It is thouroughly documented how they went about it.
I've allready given this link:
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture...
Horses and water...
NO THE VERSE DID NOT EXIST not even in other shorter somewhat older snippets found, nor in other old bibles.(Have to read about 'the snippets' still, if their is any veracity to it.)
Well let me know when you do. And it still doesn't seen to answer where that first scribe of Sinaiticus got the phrase Father forgive them....from. I don't think that scribes themselves were able to add anything that they felt like, so where did he even get that idea from? And then, a corrector questioned it, and another corrector approved of it. I would think that the scribe would never even add it if he didn't see it or was not aware of it, and the second corrector would not have gotten rid of the question mark given by the first corrector. All in all, there is nothing conclusive at all that proves that Father forgive them....is a complete forgery that was completely invented and added much later. Now I don't know if that is what you were trying to prove, and I will not even ask you what you were trying to prove, because that will change as needed as well. I get that part now. So that would be a pointless question for me to ask.

For example, you clearly laughed about Jesus being treated as a person in the NT. And I even had to requote the exact words that you said that caused me to respond. So I thought that was an odd statement to make because Satan was also treated as a person in the Hebrew scriptures, and I knew that. So I provided a link that clearly says he was treated as a person in the Hebrew scriptures, and after reading the link, you then claimed that you were talking about Satan being treated as the personification of evil, which the link substantiates. But if that was what you said in the first place, I never would have raised a flag because I know that is true. So your statements keep shifting as need be. Don't blame me, I am only responding to what you actually write, and that keeps shifting as need be and then you get angry that I requote what you actually write. If you mean something different than what you actually write, that's not my fault for not seeing that. I am not a psychic. But I think that you do actually mean what you write the first time and then merely adjust it if someone points out a problem or inaccuracy that it contains and then try to dilute the error and bury it.

So I won't bother to ask you what your point really is about the things you say, because if there is something that isn't exactly correct about your point, you will merely adjust your point to be what you need it to be.
Alex WM

London, UK

#193245 Oct 23, 2013
El Cid wrote:
<quoted text>Ex-Lax,
IF Jesus didn't exist AT ALL, then your "prophet" was both deceived and deceiving.
"Logic" is a rare commodity and Mr woodworker is unable to even buy it for cash!

You also agree fully, if JESUS PBUH did exist, then THE MOST HOLY PROPHET MOHAMMED PBUH was TRULY & RIGHTLY guided, being NEITHER deceived NOR deceiving.

Thank you Buford.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#193246 Oct 23, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
If i take too long composing a post and forget to copy it before i send it, nothing will appear.
You mentioned Matt. 22:34 well it talks about god's theoretical rolechange so the sentense continues with He ...god of the living.
Because greek concepts are introduced even greek gods like OURANOS as heaven enter the discussion about women and death and resurrecting, and therefore He becomes in that theoretical case 'god of the living'.
Later on we see that he thus muzzled the sadducees by avoiding the question. The pharisees come and take a looksee and ask themselves what the main directives are.
One quotes them and they decide not to go for muzzling jesus, but to let him be . Especially when heclaims spiritcontact with the resurrected OURANOS occupant thus David the king messiah. Claiming he will give him strenght against all enemies, because David called Jesus Lord in the spirit dream.
Frankly i would not know who the father is, since in Matt. he claims the fatherlike king/divine/messianic properties.
SO father = DAVID.= SPIRIT/comforter =YHVH is salvation.
Just as real as women reincarnating in heaven. So is his spirit-talk with David.
You need to your meds Maat.
You have no concept of the Trinity of God.
LMAO! God is not a pagan Maat!
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#193247 Oct 23, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
I love you, dear brother HughBe. I am holding back my tears.
It was a beautiful & insightful post.
You do great justice to Jesus PBUH, the wonderful man of God, who would have responded similarly to folks who tried to hurt his loving heart by taunting/tormenting him.
God Bless you.
Peace.
Alex
Boy, you are really playing this guy like a fiddle, aren't you. As far as I can tell, he says that his Jesus is the Jesus of the scriptures. Now, he also clearly said that he would never convert to Islam, so I think we can say that by Jesus of the scriptures, he means Jesus of the Gospels. That is the exact Jesus that you are trashing in completely bizarre and unfounded ways. But as long as you keep complimenting him, he will have nothing to say as you completely trash the Jesus of his scriptures. So you can recognize people that you can manipulate and are more than willing to do so, and I guess he is gullible enough to not see this.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193248 Oct 23, 2013
MAAT wrote:

where is my post?
Gdamn lenghty check-up and analyses to simply make it Obvious that Westcott # HOrt have the most nonourable , worthy and truly compasionate translation.
[[The-one moreover an-Iesous it-was-forthing, Father, thou-should-have-had-sent-off unto-them; not therefore they-had-come-to-see to-what-one they-do-unto.]]
HO the DE moreover* YHVH is salvation said father you should have sent send them away; so they do not have to see what will be done unto me.
We had women wailing before...For in the next verse the people stand and witness. Only the rulers pester.
DE is translated in so many ways that even the Islam could be meant as in the 'other' eeyisoos.
* http://lexiconcordance.com/greek/1161.html
http://www.qbible.com/greek-new-testament/luk ...
Shamma wrote:
explain your post?

Are you bonkers!
Arrejasses, you give a positive linguistically and grammatically probable nice truly worthy, honorable, mercyfull grand meaning to the last words of someone with the name 'YHVH is salvation', and they ask for EXPLANATIONS!

That was three hours of checking and rechecking and carefully putting conclusion 'n paper'.
I lost the work and try to read those long father pieces you posted. Interesting by the way. Where is the link?
And i'm not even sure i've reached the rest...

So no thank you.
Open Westcott&Hort interlineair bible.
Or www.westcotthort.com/books/Westcott_Hort_Inte...
Add the bluebible go for the verse and click greek. or qbible/greek-new-testament/
Some things people should check for themselves bar prejudice getting in the way.
Alex WM

London, UK

#193249 Oct 23, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if you are referring to the Gospels, that is the Jesus that your buddy is trashing and even doing so in wild pornographic ways on top of that. And you are perfectly fine with that. Otherwise, you would say something or correct him. And that is the company you keep. But you don't seem to like it when someone writes negative, but true things about Muhammad, but you're okay when someone trashes the Jesus of the Gospels with things that aren't even remotely true. Okay, I get it. Seems like you are more interested in being friends then telling someone where to go when appropriate and justified. There's no right and wrong, you can do whatever you choose. I just wanted some clarification and I think I get it now. I have a better understanding of the agenda. Thank you.
Just a question:
Are you fit even to carry HughBe's sandals?
God knows best.

(PS: You insult Jesus everyday by doing things he avoided and not doing things he commended.

How about trying something simple? Be MEEK!!!

You insult the scriptures by making your OWN half baked interpretations, because you are an ARROGANT person who thinks who knows everything.

You have the temerity to challenge my credentials while yours are non existent.

I have been quite patient with you without flooring you everyday with my scriptural knowledge that is far far superior to anything that you will ever come across. Just using a lot of fluff without substance does not make you look intelligent or acceptable. Please take a HINT. Thank you.).

Was BJ a CONTORTIONIST or Was HE SCRATCHING HIS HEAD WITH HIS FEET WHEN THIS HAPPENED?
Mark 14
3 Meanwhile, BJ was in Bethany at the home of Simon, a man who had previously had leprosy. While he was eating, A WOMAN (!!) came in with a beautiful alabaster jar of expensive perfume made from essence of nard.

****She broke open the jar and poured the perfume over HIS HEAD.

4 Some of those at the table were indignant.Why waste such expensive perfume? they asked.

5 It could have been sold for a years wages and the money given to the poor! So they scolded her harshly.

6 But BJ replied,Leave her alone. Why criticize her for doing such a beautiful thing to me?(I AM THE MOST IMPORTANT MAN IN TOWN!!)

7 You will always have the poor among you, and you can help them whenever you want to. But you will not always have me.

8 She has done what she could and has ANOINTED my body for burial AHEAD OF TIME!!(WONDER WHAT SHE WAS DOING IN MARK 16:9!!)
..........

ALONG COMES JOHNNY BOY!!

12.
2. A dinner was prepared in BJ's honor. Martha served, and Lazarus was among those who ate with him.

3 Then MARY took a twelve-ounce jar of expensive perfume made from essence of nard, and she anointed BJ's FEET (!!!!) with it, WIPING (seductively?) his FEET (was he a contortionist with feet on his head??lol) with HER HAIR. The house was filled with the fragrance.

4 But Judas Iscariot (poor judie oby gets it in the neck!), the disciple who would soon betray him, said,

5 That perfume was worth a years wages. It should have been sold and the money given to the poor.(judie boy was peed off and perhaps decided to land BJ in it?)

6 Not that he cared for the poorhe was a thief, and since he was in charge of the disciples money, he often stole some for himself.(he was STILL a disciple who is suppose to judge 12000 from the tribes..was it tribe of judah? or was it another?lol)

7 BJ replied,Leave her alone. She did this in preparation for my burial.

8 You will always have the poor among you (you losers!), but you will not always have me.( i am important!)

HEAD or TAIL or FEET? Lol

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193250 Oct 23, 2013
And you also need a sStrong's concordance, or genesius or maybe other sources to recheck.

Have fun.
Alex WM

London, UK

#193251 Oct 23, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Boy, you are really playing this guy like a fiddle, aren't you. As far as I can tell, he says that his Jesus is the Jesus of the scriptures. Now, he also clearly said that he would never convert to Islam, so I think we can say that by Jesus of the scriptures, he means Jesus of the Gospels. That is the exact Jesus that you are trashing in completely bizarre and unfounded ways. But as long as you keep complimenting him, he will have nothing to say as you completely trash the Jesus of his scriptures. So you can recognize people that you can manipulate and are more than willing to do so, and I guess he is gullible enough to not see this.
Ask yourself this question:
Are you fit even to carry HughBe's sandals?

I have my own opinion but God knows best.

PS: You insult Jesus everyday by doing things he avoided and not doing things he commended.

How about trying something simple? Try being MEEK!!!

You insult the scriptures by making your OWN half baked interpretations, because you are an ARROGANT person who thinks who knows everything.

You have the temerity to challenge my credentials while yours are non existent.

I have been quite patient with you without flooring you everyday with my scriptural knowledge that is far far superior to anything that you will ever come across.

Just using a lot of fluff without substance does not make you look intelligent or acceptable.

Please take a HINT. Stop digging! Thank you.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#193252 Oct 23, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
folks who tried to hurt his loving heart by taunting/tormenting him.
Can you give me an example of where someone tried to do that here?

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#193253 Oct 23, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>You need to your meds Maat.
You have no concept of the Trinity of God.
LMAO! God is not a pagan Maat!
Well if that is what you read in Matthew, your wrong.

The trinity was ones literaly included in John, but after it's removal becaue it was spurious it's a lot harder to simply find a trinity.
Those are church-tenets.
NT closed open the book on Tenets of believe=catechismus
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#193254 Oct 23, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a question:
Are you fit even to carry HughBe's sandals?
Why are you referencing a scripture that you trash on a regular basis?
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
God knows best.
(PS: You insult Jesus everyday by doing things he avoided and not doing things he commended.
How about trying something simple? Be MEEK!!!
What you forget is that Jesus also had quite the sharp tongue for deceptive manipulators and liars. You deserve every single thing you get from me. You ask for it, and you get it. Ask, and you shall receive. LOL!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Archaeology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Kurt Simmons: Verbal inspiration and inerrancy ... Sep 15 eee 1
Buddha bowl return request gets louder Sep 14 Min 44
Before 'Noah': Myths of the Flood Are Far Older... Sep 12 Rabbeen Al Jihad 44
Jim Long: Noahide, Archaeologist, Filmmaker Sep 12 Yenda Rinderpest 1
5 horrific things that can haunt your finances Sep 5 THE BAR is RICO 1
Boy stumbles upon an ancient arrowhead Aug 27 MUQ1 1
Greek archaeologists enter large underground tomb Aug 27 MUQ1 1
•••

Archaeology People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••